The "Good" Politicians of Canberra

Canberra has taught me a few things over the years and one of them has to be the ability to spot a "good" politician. I say this after being entertained by one Julie Bishop at the Africa Day celebration event on the 27th of May. The celebration is organised by the African diplomatic core and held to commemorate the formation of the Organisation of African Unity in 1963, the organisation which now stands as the renamed African Union. 

To be precise, the statement that has left me as convinced as to think of Julie as a "good" politician boils down to her choice of words when it came to her reference of Australia's aide to Africa. The facts of the recently released budget stand as being that foreign assistance will be frozen and capped to a ceiling with the Department of Foreign Affairs expected to shed some $400m weight through efficiency gains from merging with the Australian Agency for International Development. 

The Government will achieve savings of $7.6 billion over five years by maintaining official development assistance (ODA) at its nominal 2013‑14 level of $5.0 billion in each of 2014‑15 and 2015‑16. From 2016‑17 ODA will grow in line with the Consumer Price Index. The savings include $2.0 billion in 2017‑18 by removing the provision previously set aside for ODA spending.
As part of these savings, the Government has decided to reverse previous decisions to join the African Development Bank Group and the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and has introduced a cap on departmental costs for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) to administer ODA equivalent to 5 per cent of DFAT's total ODA budget. (2014-2015 Budget - Paper No. 2 - Expense Measures - Foreign Affairs & Trade)

Julie Bishop referenced the aide that Australia provides to Africa but didn't say at which side, in the north-south map that the monies will be moving to. With some economic insight, one can clearly see the equivalence between "savings", "efficiency gains" and cuts, but with no economic insight and with some eloquently rehearsed off-the-top-of-your-head political language oratory, one can surely fail to see the stark difference as it's nicely disguised within the prose.

With that said, I still thank Canberra for opening up my eyes and driven within me the hunger for in-depth critical analysis. It becomes quite hard to take things as they come once one discovers the facts behind the talk or in this case, the rust beneath the coating. But will the average Australian have the same drive to scrutinise political speech for what it is?

But maybe the story might be different if I'd